“There is a terrific disadvantage in not having the abrasive quality of the press applied to you daily. Even though we never like it, and even though we wish they didn’t write it, and even though we disapprove, there isn’t any doubt that we could not do the job at all in a free society without a very, very active press.”

–John F Kennedy – 1962

The media coverage of the Iraq war of 2003 represents a prime example of how capable the media is of forging people’s perceptions about an event or an idea. US mainstream media channels were accused of selling a pro-war narrative to the Americans during the invasion, without questioning the nitty-gritties of the war. Fox News became the number one rated channel that produced live coverage of the war and hailed the American army as a “hero”. Critics blamed the media for giving undue attention to the victories of the army and for underreporting the civilian casualties. Any criticism or anti-war rhetoric was filtered out by these news channels. One reporter in particular, Peter Arnett, was fired for raising doubts over the United States’ invasion while speaking in an interview with the Iraqi officials. A poll was conducted by FactCheck.org, after the US Presidential elections of 2008, which showed that 48% of Americans still believed in Saddam Hussein’s involvement in the 9/11 attacks. The group stated that “voters, once deceived, tend to stay that way despite all evidence.” It is not surprising how such deceptive practices have infiltrated the media all around the world. False advertisements, propagandas in talk shows, image manipulations and scripted as well as staged reality TV shows, call for a trigger of our sixth sense to differentiate between what is authentic and what is not. Without digging deeper into the facts, we often end up voting for the wrong party or even waste our money on buying the wrong product.